Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare, Edited by Scott L. Newstok (Parlor Press, 2007).

 

Introduction and Note on the Text: Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare begins with an introduction written by editor Scott Newstok. It attempts to articulate the importance of Burke's writings on Shakespeare. Summing up his purpose, Newstok writes, "[The introduction is] an attempt (perhaps necessarily frustrated) at 'placing' a critic whose writings resisted such placement throughout his life" (xvii). Newstok hopes his opening piece will "induce readers to turn (or return) to Burke's Shakespeare essays and discover for themselves a remarkable voice, for which no introduction can ever serve as a substitute" (xvii-xviii). Newstok details various responses to Burke, as well as the ways in which Burke uses specific strategies and stylistic devices when discussing Shakespeare. The introduction is an overview of the project, as well as a justification for its existence.

The "Note on the Text" details Newstok's compilation methods, noting chronological ordering of the essays with the exception of the first chapter (li). Annotations and editing decisions are addressed, especially in relation to Burke's spelling and frequent allusions. Newstok specifically mentions the addition of lecture transcripts, and his decision to include text that was crossed off of typed transcripts (lv).

I. "Introduction: Shakespeare Was What?"ÑDelivered as a lecture on May 9th, 1964, at the Nebraska Convention of the Sigma Tau Delta Honor Society, Kearney State College (p. 3).

A. Burke begins with a statement that details what his lecture will not be about.

1. He will not "attempt reading Shakespeare's works as the story of his private life" (3).

2. Even if there is a real life basis for Shakespeare's characters and plots, it is always tailored to the requirements of fiction in plays and sonnets. As Burke puts it, "Whatever the story's possible grounding truth, it gives ample signs of having been developed in accordance with the rules of a highly complicated stylistic game" (4).

B. Having separated Shakespeare's biography and works, Burke goes on to point out that, in spite of the distinction, Shakespeare's plays do have a self-involved quality to them (4).

1. Burke believes you can refer to the works as either "suicidal or narcissistic" (4).

2. Citing, Othello, Antony and Cleopatra, and Timon of Athens, he uses examples to illustrate his argument.

a. In Timon of Athens, "When Timon rails against Apemantus, he is really railing against an embarrassing copy of himself" (4).

b. In Antony and Cleopatra, there are several references to self-willed death, which Burke cites specifically, noting Act, Scene, and Line numbers (5).

C. Moving to a different example, discusses the relationship between Shakespeare's life and works using The Merchant of Venice.

1. In an anecdote about working on the play with a student, Burke tells the audience about ideas of justice and mercy and their importance in the bible and the play.

a. He argues, "In a highly patriarchal society such as our Western Culture was built upon, we tend to think of justice as essentially sever and paternal, of mercy as maternal" (6).

b. Given this concept, it is surprising that, after all the characters in The Merchant of Venice are paired up based on romantic interest, the only two left are Shylock and Antonio.

2. Shylock wants justice, and Antonio wants mercy, but their pairing does not conform to the cultural stereotypes of those two concepts.

D. Having noted the curiosity, Burke begins a discussion of the historical period in which Shakespeare wrote.

1. Burke argues that Shakespeare's plays show the influence of his time period.

a. Shakespeare wrote at "the turn from feudal thinkingÉto the kind of social and political strivings that would involve the attempts to produce a central monarch" (7)

b. The attitude stemmed mainly from the War of the Roses, which pitted one royal family against another.

c. Nationalism and capitalism both accompanied the move towards central authority.

2. Burke encourages his audience to use this historical knowledge when examining the motivations present in Shakespeare's works.

3. Burke argues that Shakespeare responded to these life themes not with verbs or adjectives but with characters. He used the "terminology of drams." The exigencies of the time were transformed into a series of relationship between dramatis personae.

4. The brilliance of Shakespeare's approach is that drama anticipates the unfolding of ideas via "acts" (8). In theory at least, Shakespeare's method allowed him to articulate positions and anticipate outcomes via fiction.

E. Moving forward from his assessment of Shakespeare's works as a response to historical circumstances, Burke next differentiates himself from Shakespeare biographers.

1. Burke argues, "People who write lives of Shakespeare necessarily work out the steps from the standpoint of their own development, which may or may not happen to coincide with Shakespeare's" (8). Biographies focus too much on the personal and not on the historical.

2. Rather than discuss Shakespeare personally, Burke says he will attempt to discuss him "in principle" (8).

F. Burke argues, "Shakespeare produced the illusion of characters" (9). His characters embody principles more than they embody personality, and Burke believes that they were created based on the feelings Shakespeare wanted to inspire. Shakespeare was especially adept at using characters to promote the desired audience response.

1. Shakespeare's mastery of his craft is a complex topic. In part, it is difficult because drama necessarily needs a "moral" (9). That is, a character in an effective play needs to be "excessive" in some way, and when a playwright constructs a character in that way, he or she is necessarily warning against something (9).

2. Yet, Shakespeare's mastery shines through his plays in spit of this. Burke argues that where Hollywood films can rely on elaborate sets and lofty budgets, Shakespeare had to rely on only his words to create a scene (and the corresponding feeling within his audience). Perhaps everyone knows this, but Burke urges us to "consider its full implications" (11).

a. The most important implication is that Shakespeare had to write lines that both furthered the plot and described the background. His characters' lines had to be both functional and decorative.

b. The decorative purpose of his lines (and thus an element of his skill) is diminished when a Shakespearean drama is produced in a modern setting with elaborate sets and effects. In such settings, some lines feel excessive rather than functional (11).

c. Burke uses the "action"/"motion" distinction in order to address the problem more fully. He argues that modern actors must mark time by doing things like lighting cigarettes ("motion") in order to compensate for lines that do not allow them to participate in "action." "Action" is dictated by the scene and not by the lines themselves.

d. Burke argues that Shakespeare was a master at uses lines to produce "action."

G. Having discussed Shakespeare's skill, Burke arms his listeners with a list of questions that should be asked when evaluating Shakespeare's plays (12).

1. What kind of tension is being exploited?

2. For what kind of effects?

3. What kind of situation is used to exploit the tension?

4. What kind of prime character is best adapted to a particular excess?

5. What subsidiary characters are needed?

6. What kind of images best lend themselves to this particular enterprise?

7. To sum up: How does the play point the arrows of our expectation (13)?

H. Burke argues that it is the fulfillment of expectation, not surprise, that makes a play enjoyable.

1. He cites the conclusion of Othello to support his point. The value of Othello's death as surprise is diminished after the first encounter. From then on, it is satisfying only as the fulfillment of audience expectations (13).

2. Burke sums up by arguing, "Thus, when inquiring into the structure of Shakespeare's plays, we are well-advised to begin, even with the first few lines, asking ourselves just how the dramatist is shaping the patterns of our expectation" (14). It is through the building of expectation that the audience is drawn into the plot.

I. Elaborating on Shakespeare's brilliance, Burke attempts to explain Shakespeare's range of knowledge with an intriguing theory.

1. Burke associates Shakespeare with Plato, asserting the possibility that Shakespeare had already "experienced the need for the word before he ever heard it so that (as in Plato's theory) learning was more like "remembering" something already known but forgotten, than like the accumulating of novelties" (14).

2. Burke explains using an example from Hamlet, arguing that rather than associating words with meanings and definitions, he associated them with dramatic situations and personalities (15).

3. Burke claims that Shakespeare was a master of associations, arguing that he could have won the kind of game where one invents a description of an unknown object and then has to justify that description in terms of a revealed, actual object (16).

4. All of this leads to the conclusion that Shakespeare encountered various tensions in his life (most notably those of feudalism vs. capitalism, etc., already discussed by Burke), and he found a way to turn those tensions into "sources of aesthetic delight" (17).

J. Given all of this, Burke believes that Aristotle's Rhetoric can give us the most meaningful insights into Shakespeare's beliefs.

1. He cites the "topics" that deal with persuading and dissuading audiences and building up and tearing down character as a specific source of insight (17).

2. The difference between the orator and Shakespeare is that Shakespeare "is aiming simply to form our attitudes towards a set of imaginary characters, and to exploit these attitudes for sheerly artistic ends" (18). This makes Shakespeare moving in the emotional sense as opposed to the behavioral sense (18).

3. Still, the Rhetoric is all about how to inspire fear, love, anger, etc., and Shakespeare uses his characters to create those same sentiments.

4. Thus, the Rhetoric greatly helps us understand Shakespeare's beliefs. He was a master at translating social forces into dramatic personalities, and letting the conflicts play out according to the conventions of fiction. He was a master a stirring up desired feelings. He was a master at creating attitudes.

5. Burke sums up: "[Shakespeare's] plays repeatedly testify to a belief in the reality of a social order, or social ladder, with a corresponding problemÉWhen one is placed in a particular social order, to what extent is his [sic] conduct to be judged in the absolute, and to what extent in terms of his particular place in that order?And though Shakespeare beyond all doubt believed in the ubiquitous reality of a social orderÉhe seems to have believed more in its inevitability than its desirability" (19).

6. All of this leads Burke to assert a paradox. Shakespeare's characters each embody an attitude or role. Yet each can only function in terms of the situation which surrounds him or her, including other characters. Individual characters are, in a sense, unique, but part of what gives them their uniqueness is their placement within a group of other assorted characters (19).

K. Burke's closing question asks, "What, then, did Shakespeare believe" (19)? His answer is that Shakespeare believed in the above paradox and its consequences. As Burke puts it, "I think he necessarily believed in the overriding persistence of this very problem" (19). That is, Shakespeare's work bears out a belief than no character can stand on his or her own, even as he or she is a unique creation. The consequences can be comedic, tragic, grotesque, or something else entirely, but the problem is an inevitable one, and it is illustrated in many of Shakespeare's dramas" (19-20).

II. "Psychology and Form" (Originally outlined by Joshua Gunn. Page numbers edited to match Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. Bracketed sections indicate added comments).

A. Burke begins with a scene from Hamlet to illustrate what he means by form [The scene discussed is Act 1, Scene 4, in which Hamlet is on the lookout for the ghost of his father. Burke attempts to show how the lines of Act 1, Scene portend the appearance of the ghost in Act 1, Scene 5. It is a specific example of form that leads into his general discussion of the concept (21-22)]:

1. Form: "form would be the psychology of the audience. Or, seen from another angle, form is the creation of an appetite in the mind of the auditor, and the adequate satisfying of that appetite" (22).

a) necessity of frustration: form involves a "temporary set of frustrations, but in the end these frustrations prove to be simply a more involved kind of satisfaction, and furthermore serve to make the satisfaction of fulfillment more intense" (22).

[Hence, Shakespeare uses the opening act of Hamlet to instill within the audience a desire to encounter the ghost of Hamlet, Sr. This desire is temporarily frustrated in Act 1, Scene 4, only to be fulfilled in a more satisfying way in Act 1, Scene 5].

2. Aesthetic judgment has been sullied by the injection of "scientific criteria" (22).

a) has split "form" from content ("subject-matter").

b) has split "technique" from "psychology"

B. Burke distinguishes two types of "psychology":

1. Psychology of information: displaces the psychology of the audience with the psychology of the "hero" or subject; specific details and bits of information are valued over that of the whole. From this perspective, "one might denounce Cezanne's trees in favor of state forestry bulletins" (23).

a) "Under such an attitude, when form is preserved it is preserved as an annex, a luxury, or as some feel, a downright affectation" (23-24).

[To cement his claims and further distinguish the "psychology of information" and the "psychology of form," Burke returns to Hamlet. He discusses both Hamlet's speech to the players and Hamlet's confrontation with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern over their "playing him like a pipe." In both cases, Burke argues, Hamlet's lines provide interesting pieces of information, but they also forward the form of the play. Shakespeare's refusal to provide "mere information" is part of his genius (24-25)].

b) The corresponding methods of sustaining interest "are surprise and suspense" (27).

(1) "Suspense is the concern over the possible outcome of some specific detail of plot rather than for general qualities. Thus, 'Will A marry B or C?' is suspense" (28).

2. Psychology of form: Eschews the informational details in favor of the whole, focuses on the desires of the audience. Information is subsumed by the form (e.g., plays a "minor" role).

a) Music is offered as the example par excellence of the psychology of form: "Here form cannot atrophy. Every dissonant chord cries for its solution, and whether the musician resolves or refuses to resolve this dissonance into the chord which the body cries for, he is dealing with human appetites" (26).

b) The corresponding method of sustaining interest is eloquence, or "formal excellence" (27).

C. Eloquence (or formal excellence) is the end of art, and therefore is also the "essence of art":

1. "Eloquence is not showiness; it is, rather, the result of that desire in the artist to make a work perfect by adapting in it every minute detail to the racial appetites" (30). [Thus, Hamlet provides evidence of Shakespeare's skill. Going back to Chapter 1, the example of Shakespeare versus the modern Hollywood film is appropriate here. Shakespeare relied on words to both create scenes and instill certain feelings within his audience. He provided a framework and then filled that framework. His work can be returned to again and again and appreciated for its creative architecture. It does not rely on simple suspense and surprise.]

2. Corresponds to Burke's definition of "aesthetic truth:"

a) Aesthetic truth is "the exercise of human propriety, the formulation of symbols which rigidify our sense of poise and rhythm. Artistic truth is the externalization of taste" (31).

b) Aesthetic truth is not synonymous with scientific truth, since "the procedure of science involves the elimination of taste, employing as a substitute the corrective norm of the pragmatic test, the empirical experiment, which is entirely intellectual" (31, n8).

3. Eloquence can be meticulous and precise, however, it does not (cannot) succumb to the psychology of information.

III. "Trial Translation (from Twelfth Night)"

A. Imagining himself to inhabit the persona of the Duke, in Twelfth Night, Burke uses this essay to dissect the opening lines of the play, providing an analysis of how they work to mold the expectations of the audience.

B. Burke, going line-by-line, comments on the specific purpose of the play's first 20 lines.

1. Line 1: "If music be the food of love, play on (33).

a. Burke uses the metaphor of the fetus in the womb to describe the purpose of this line.

b. He argues that the audience is lulled into acquiescence, prepared to be immersed in the world placed before them (34).

2. Lines 2-3: "Give me excess of it, that, surfeiting, the appetite may sicken and so die" (34).

a. Here, the expectations of line 1 are altered. No longer will the audience gleefully bask in the glow of the drama being presented for them.

b. Shakespeare contrasts bodily hunger (food) with soul hunger (music). The second line claims that "in the nutriment of music, there is an added hunger stirred up" (34). Shakespeare thus introduces the theme of melancholy.

3. Line 4: "That strain again, it had a dying fall" (34).

a. An additional modification is presented.

b. Through a "dying fall," Shakespeare offers the opportunity of tuning out the goings-on on stage. His audience can become dead to them. They can become unresponsive (35).

4. Lines 5-7: "O, it came o'er my ear like the sweet sound that breathes upon a bank of violets, stealing and giving odour" (35)

a. Burke argues that these lines speak directly to Elizabethan England (35).

b. Rather than being immobile and resigned, Shakespeare is turning his audience into hunters by invoking the smell of violets (36).

5. Lines 7-8: "Enough, no more. 'Tis not so sweet now as it was before" (36). Burke argues that Shakespeare continues the action-oriented theme begun in the previous lines. Enough or the music. Business must begin.

6. Lines 9-14: "O spirit of love, how quick and fresh art thou that, notwithstanding thy capacity receiveth as the sea, naught enters there, of what validity and pitch so e'er but falls into abatement and low price even in a minute" (36)! Here, Burke argues, the Duke fully becomes the hunter already alluded to.

7. Burke closes by quoting lines 16-18, in which Curio invites the Duke to hunt. The opening lines have thus produced a form that has lead to a fitting conclusion.

IV. "Antony in Behalf of the Play" (Originally outlined by Kristine Bruss, Tim Behme, and Greg Schneider. Page numbers edited to match Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. Brackets indicate added notations).

In this clever essay, KB shows how literature acts upon an audience by taking Julius Caesar's Antony and turning his internal soliloquy into an external commentary, thus showing how the play produces its effects. Here are some excerpts:



This reader-writer relationship is emphasized in the following article, which is an
imaginary speech by Antony. Instead of addressing the mob, as he is pictured in the third act of Julius Caesar, he turns to the audience. And instead of being a dramatic character within the play, he is here made to speak as a critical commentator upon the play, explaining its mechanism and its virtues. Thus we have a tale from Shakespeare, retold, not as a plot but from the standpoint of the rhetorician, who is concerned with a work's processes of appeal (38). [Here, Burke again demonstrates a preoccupation with the ways in which Shakespeare instills certain desires within his audience. He makes clear the connection between the Rhetoric and Shakespeare. Antony is no longer a character, but an orator, and Burke is dissecting his technique in terms of both the play and Shakespeare's Elizabethan audience.]



Antony: Friends, Romans, countrymen . . . oneÑtwoÑthree syllables: hence, in this progression, a magic formula. "Romans" to fit the conditions of the play; "countrymen" the better to identify the play-mob with the mob in the pitÑfor we are in the Renaissance, at that point when Europe's vast national integers are taking shape. . . (39).



All that I as Antony do to this play-mob, as a character-recipe I do to you. He would play upon you; he would seem to know your stops; he would sound you from your lowest note to the top of your compass. He thinks you as easy to be played upon as a pipe (39). [The allusion to Hamlet is important to note. Antony is again examined in terms of having a dual purpose in the analyzed scene.]



Still, you are sorry for Caesar. We cannot profitably build a play around the horror of a murder if you do not care whether the murdered man lives or dies (40).



And when this play is over, Antony alone of the major characters will live; for
 you like to have about you such a man as might keep guard at the door while you sleep. Given certain conceptions of danger, I become the sign of safety. A little sunshine-thought, to take home with you after these many slaughterings. . . .I grant that on this last score I am not the perfect recipe. My author has provided
purer comfort-recipes for you elsewhere (41).



We have clinched the arrows of your expectancy, incidentally easing our obligations as regard the opening of Act IV. You will be still more wisely handled by what follows, as our Great Demagogue continues to manipulate your minds (48).

[Burke's approach in this essay is an extension of his approach in "A Trial Translation." He uses the method, adding in the element of speaking as Antony. The essay again demonstrates Burke's admiration for Shakespeare as he illustrates Antony's significance as both a compelling character and as a means for communicating with the Elizabethan audience.]

V. "Imagery."

A. Burke opens the essay by referencing Caroline Spurgeon's Shakespeare's Imagery (1935). He then uses a review of the work to segue into his claim that an analysis of imagery "serves better to point in the general direction of something than for acute microscopic divisions" (49).

B. Burke claims to have thought of something like Spurgeon's Shakespeare's Imagery (49). He also asserts the importance of charting imagery.

1. The proposal differed in that Burke planned to use already-made concordances to chart the imagery and connotations of that imagery in the works of various poets. Spurgeon charted Shakespeare's plays on her own, beginning from scratch and noting each image and its use in a given context.

a. Spurgeon's project is more thorough and fulfilling. It can "disclose statistically how Shakespeare frequently organized a play about a key or pivotal metaphor" (51). He cites examples. Hamlet is organized around the ulcer, and Romeo and Juliet relies on light imagery (51).

b. Burke postulates that Shakespeare may have been conscious of creating such organization (51).

2. Burke uses two main examples to explain the importance of imagery and the critical insights that a thorough examination of imagery can lead to.

a. Citing Spurgeon's work, Burke says, "She notes, for instance, that when Shakespeare would picture either war or hell, he relies upon the imagery of noise of stench" (51). Thus, when encountering a Shakespearean description of a noisy, smelly city, the critic should ask, "Well, which is it? War or Hell" (51)?

b. Burke compares Shakespeare's use of silence to Poe's, arguing that the latter feared silence, while the former embraced it (51-52).

c. Additional, minor examples include Shakespeare's use of imagery in Cymbeline, The Tempest, and The Winter's Tale (52).

3. Burke warns that imagery displays things about an author that even the author may not recognize. Authors should "watch their metaphors," lest they indict themselves with their own symbols (note I, p. 49-50).

C. Stating a summary appreciation for Spurgeon's work, Burke goes on to attempt to match the historical arc of Shakespeare's writings with the major historical events of Shakespeare's life.

1. Burke claims that Shakespeare's early plays commented heavily on feudalism. He gives examples.

a. He writes, "This we see clearly in the feudal nature of the conflict in Romeo and Juliet. Feudalism was constructed about metaphors of the family, and this play involved a quarrel between families" (53).

b. Also, "The ideals of grace and elegance embodied in his early plays were integrally linked with courtly standards" (53).

2. Moving on to the period of the tragedies, Burke calls it "the period of crisis" (53).

a. The feudal way of life has come into conflict with rising notions of individual enterprise. Burke argues that Shakespeare feels this conflict through characters like Lear, "who loses his feudal property of kingship," and Othello, "who loses his 'property in' courtly love" (53).

b. Burke claims that these characters represent a profound crisis in Shakespeare's writing career.

c. Hamlet exemplifies the crisis in that it deals in uncertainty. The playwright is supposed to provide certainty within a given context. Since Hamlet does not do this, Burke argues, "Shakespeare is threatened with the loss of his essential identity, his identity as playwright. His exposure to the rise of new standards threatens to deprive him of his 'property in' the craft of writing itself" (53).

3. Burke claims that "Shakespeare met the crisis and surmounted it" (53).

a. The Tempest provides evidence. Burke argues, "The tempest ends as the play begins. The play is the aftermath of the tempest" (53-54).

b. The Tempest shows that Shakespeare overcame his period of crisis. Further evidence is provided by the imagery of sound in the play. Discord at the beginning; harmony at the conclusion (54).

c. The release of Caliban signals Shakespeare's readiness to abandon writing. He has accomplished his goals and can exit the stage nobly (54).

D. Burke closes by addressing The Winter's Tale as another culmination. He writes, "The Winter's Tale in its title attests to connotations of subsidence. And the author's dramatic philosophy is rounded out by his somewhat pantheistic sense of 'universal undulation' in which all spiritual and bodily movements are subtly merged" (55). Shakespeare's philosophy has "rounded out," and, thus he can leave the writing craft behind knowing he has left a masterful record of history, struggle, crisis, and coping.

VI. "Socio-anagogic Interpretation of Venus and Adonis."

A. Burke believes that Shakespeare's narriative poem Venus and Adonis is worth examining because it is a story of sexual courtship and thus gives insight into "the courtly motive in literary works" (56).

1. In it, "a sexually mature goddess ardently courts a sexually immature human male" (56)

2. The male refuses, claiming to only be interested in hunting.

3. Shakespeare describes the hunt in courtly terms.

B. Given Shakespeare's courtly treatment of the hunt, there are three major characters in the poem.

1. Venus, the goddess.

2. Adonis, the human.

3. The boar, an animal.

4. Each character is thus of a different "class" (56).

C. Minor characters "amplify the theme of courtship" and provide "dramatic comment" (57).

D. Adonis' horse is part of a symbolic "cluster" that represents Adonis' sexual desire. The horse represents animalistic desire (57).

E. Burke asks why Adonis would resist Venus in the first place.

1. Part of the answer lies in the notion of "incest tabu" (58). The poem suggests that Venus is a mother figure, and so it would be unnatural for Adonis to yield to her promptings.

2. The forbidden sexual passion is channeled into the act of hunting.

a. Adonis fails to distinguish between "maternal" and "erotic" women (58).

b. Adonis' relation to the boar is "vaguely homosexual" (58)

c. Homosexuality and the problem of the mother are thus symbolically merged (58).

F. The mother-son issues having been cleared away, Burke moves on to the real point of the essay. He argues that the poem has much to say about hierarchy, claiming that "goddess, boy, and boar represent three different motivational classes" (59).

1. Understanding "celestial" terms and "social" terms and their various connections is important for understanding the poem's use of imagery (59).

a. The "celestial" can be anything that implies "supernatural motivation" (59).

b. The "social" is the earthly.

c. There is not a straightforward divide between the two, as that which masquerades as "celestial" can have social implications and vice versa.

d. Venus and Adonis is a case in point. Venus is a goddess, but she is also "begging favors of an inferior" (59). She is not a goddess in any real sense. Burke argues that the poem is all about the proposition "goddess is to mortal as noblewoman is to commoner" (59). Despite its celestial symbols, the poem is about social order.

2. Burke claims that the interpretation could be pushed. He works out an argument where the poem is translated into entirely social terms, with the goddess symbolizing the upper class, the human the middle class, and the boar the lower class (60).

3. Burke then backtracks, claiming that one need go so far in order to make a compelling argument about the poem. He simply wishes to point out the connection between social order and courtship as contained within the poem (60).

G. Burke argues that the poem is not erotic in a strictly sexual sense. Looking beneath the sexual imagery, one can better see the social implications of the poem.

1. In analyzing a series of lines, Burke claims that Venus is eventually belittled. Her status is downgraded, while Adonis, due to his ardent refusal, is uplifted (61).

2. Elaborating, Burke argues that such developments are not purely sexual. Rather, they have very real social implications. He says, "sexual courtship is intrinsically fused with the motives of social hierarchy" (61).

H. A "socio-anagogic" view of the poem, then, leads to the conclusion that Venus and Adonis seeks to promote social revolution.

1. Shakespeare uses sexual terms to say things that could not have been said in "social or political terms" (61). He argues for a change in social hierarchy, but does with the imagery of courtship.

2. Such an attempted at reversal is especially apparent in the poem's closing lines, as Shakespeare writes, "Pluck down the rich, enrich the poor with treasures" (62).

3. Burke understands that Venus and Adonis "could not be exhaustively discussed in terms of social order alone" (62). But, he believes, "the ultimate motive, whatever they may be, get poignancy and direction from the social order" (62).

4. The poem's emphasis on pride provides further evidence of its relationship to class and order (62).

I. Burke does not necessarily believe that Shakespeare consciously constructed Venus and Adonis to cloak a program of social revolution in erotic terms (63). Stating this point, he moves into a discussion of how critics are to interpret poetry.

1. Burke argues that the poet works with "charismatic" subjects (63). He writes, "The poet's symbols are enigmatic, that they stand for a hidden realm, a mystery" (63). Symbol interpretation, then, involves attempting to unravel the mystery.

2. Burke argues that symbols in poetry connect to the "judgment of status" (63). Socio-anagogic interpretation involves searching for and discovering those connections (63).

3. Burke closes with a definition of socio-anagogic criticism, writing, "In brief, the socio-anagogic sense notes how the things of books and the book of Nature 'signify what relates to worldly glory'" (64). Such criticism is an attempt to uncover the connection between poetic symbols and social hierarchy.

VII. "Othello: An Essay to Illustrate a Method"

A. After briefly describing the plays final scene, Othello's closing soliloquy, and Iago's role as a "devil's advocate" (66), Burke moves on to define two Greek terms he believes are essential for understanding the play's theme of cure.

1. Katharma: "that which is thrown away in cleansing; the offscourings, refuse, of a sacrifice; hence, worthless fellow" (66). Burke also points out that this term provides the root for catharsis.

2. Pharmakos: Synonym for Katharma. "Poisoner, sorcerer, magician; one who is sacrificed or executed as an atonement or purification for others; a scapegoat" (66).

3. Burke argues that Iago serves a necessary function in the play because he fulfills these functions. Iago represents Othello's inward struggles. He is their externalization. Burke writes, "Villain and hero here are but essentially inseparable parts of the one fascination" (66).

4. Iago and Othello are tied together through Desdemona. Othello fears the theft of Desdemona. She becomes his possession, and Iago the part of him that fears losing her. These three forces "wrestle with" each other on stage (67).

5. The evidence for this can be seen in the play's opening lines. "Thieves" are mentioned, and the theme of robbery is brought out (67).

B. Burke delves deeper into an examination of Desdemona's role, interpreting her as a kind of object.

1. Burke claims that Othello does not view Desdemona as an "aesthetic object" (67). Such a view would give her greater power. As it is, she simply belongs to Othello.

2. This creates a complex relationship between Desdemona and the audience.

a. She is an example of Coleridge's "extremes meet (67).

b. To the audience, Desdemona is an aesthetic object. We recognize that she does not belong exclusively to us as individuals.

c. Yet we also recognize that she is "imitating" something (68). Burke argues that she is "imitating her third of the total tension. She is imitating a major perturbation of property, as so conceived" (68).

d. Desdemona is and is not and aesthetic object.

3. Burke sums up, relating the play to the Enclosure Acts, "whereby common lands were made private" (69). Of the play, he writes, "Here is the analogue, in the realm of human affinity" (69).

4. Iago becomes the scapegoat for all of this. He is the devil that can serve as catharsis.

C. Burke moves to a new section titled "Ideal Paradigm." In it, he outlines the "ideal paradigm for a Shakespearean tragedy" (70).

1. Act 1: "Setting the situation, pointing the arrows, with first unmistakable guidance of the audience's attitude towards the dramatis personae, and with similar setting of expectations as regards plot" (7).

2. Act 2 might have one or both of two purposes.

a. "While events are developing towards the peripety, the audience is also allowed to become better acquainted with a secondary character much needed for the action" (70).

b. "Or might the best way to approach the second act be to treat it as analogous to the introduction of the second theme" (70)

3. Act 3: "The Trap is Laid" or "The Mock Disclosure" (72). Also, a related purpose, "gradual revelation of the character's designs" (73). Iago's villainous deceit of Othello is an example. Burke does not list it here, but Act 3 of Hamlet, the "Play-within-the-Play," seems to fit both characteristics as well.

4. Act 4: "The Pity of It." (73). Burke characterizes it as "pity-pity-pity repeatedly" (73) and offers examples.

5. Act 5: "The bringing of all surviving characters to a final relationship" (74).

6. Burke notes some difficulties with his description of plot development, and he offers an alternative of the five acts as a kind of initiation.

a. Act 1: "The way in." (75).

b. Act 2: "Pushing-off from shore" (75).

c. Act 3: "The principle of internality confronts its very essence. Here is the withinness-of-withinness" (75). (Incidentally, I have no idea what that means. Hope you have better luck with it). Hamlet is offered as the clearest example.

d. Acts 4 and 5: We are gradually returned to the starting point, but everything is essentially altered. We are "released," having undergone a kind of transformative initiation (76-77).

D. Burke moves to his third section, titled "Dramatis Personae." It is an analysis of characters begun by his assertion that the guiding principle should be the "agent-act ratio" (77). That is, each character acts according to his or her personality and together those actions form a cooperative whole.

1. Shakespeare was a master at creating characters because he centered them around strong traits that worked well with the main themes of his plays (77).

2. Burke argues that tensions should be identified and then characters analyzed to uncover how they function to throw a specific tension into relief.

a. Major characters like the Othello-Desdemona-Iago trio illustrate the tension around property (78).

b. Minor characters act in a way that reinforces its importance (78).

3. Shakespeare uses character weaknesses to push forward the events of the play. The characters do not stand alone in this type of analysis. In contrast to "novelistic analysis," the purposes of the author are more directly considered here (79).

4. Burke argues, "Othello as 'Moor' draws for its effects upon the sense of the 'black man' in every lover" (80).

a. That is, Othello is acknowledged as Desdemona's lord, but there is a "self-doubting" part of him that leads him to believe he is not fit to be such (80).

b. This leads to terrible consequences.

c. Burke has reservations about the specific critic claim, but he believes it is the kind of assertion that should be made by solid character analysis (80).

d. The right kind of character analysis considers the action of the play as a whole, not just the actions of a particular character (80).

e. Burke differentiates between character and role (81).

f. Burke goes on to comment on the insufficiencies of the methods of other critics, using Iago's wife Emilia as his example character.

5. Burke then begins a section on the critical shortcomings of "comic relief," arguing that it's more complicated than that.

a. "Comic relief" is as much relief for the dramatist as for the audience (82).

b. "When the audience is carried beyond a certain intensity, it threatens to rebel, for its own comfort. But the playwright might engage it even here to, by shifting just before the audience is ready to rebel. However, he [sic] will shift in ways that subtly rebuke the audience for its resistance, and make it willing afterwards to fall back into line" (82).

6. Burke claims that in the case of Othello, one character (Emilia) states a principle in direct opposition to the assumptions on which the play is built" (82). How can that be explained, he asks.

a. Burke argues that audience members might resist the excessive (that word again) nature of a tragedy. "One might think it unwise of the dramatist to let their resistance be expressed on the stage" (83).

b. Burke argues that Emilia is a mere mortal among the larger-than-life figures of Desdemona, Iago, and Othello. Her speaking of resistance, then, is a de facto endorsement of the values of the play. It says, "Only lowlies like me refuse to fall in line with the assumption of tragedy. These noble people accept it." (Contrast this with Burke's discussion of Thersites in the Antony and Cleopatra essay).

7. Burke again argues for his way of analyzing characters over others, using the examples of Hamlet and Iago. Eventually, he gets to the gem of a line "Shakespeare is making a play, not people" (84).

8. Burke is not wholly against the "novelistic analysis" of drama. But he cautions that such observations "are the preparatory material for critical analysis, not the conclusions" (85).

9. After hammering away for several pages and bombarding the reader with reasons why his approach is better than others, Burke mercifully moves on to another section.

E. Section IV is titled "Peripety," and in its first paragraph Burke says he plans to analyze "the ways in which the playwright builds up 'potentials' (that is, gives the audience a more or less vague or explicit 'in our next' feeling at the end of each scene, and subsequently transforms such promises into fulfillments" (87).

1. Burke claims that the audience is invited into Iago's plot to deceive Othello. As such, "The audience is somewhat invited to watch the plot as plot" (87).

2. Burke moves into a lengthy analysis of Act 3, Scene 3 of Othello, detailing the ways in which Iago manipulates Othello and the ways in which Shakespeare manipulates the audience.

a. Importantly, he points out that "Othello must show strong resistance, too. Otherwise, this bullfight will not be spectacle enough" (90).

b. He also highlights a speech that points out the explicit values Desdemona is linked with for Othello. They are "Ambition, virtue, quality, pride, pomp, circumstance, glory, and zest in his dangerous occupation" (92).

3. Burke argues that Act 3, Scene 3 reinforces the connectedness of Desdemona, Iago, and Othello. It especially emphasizes Othello and Iago as "related not as the halves of a sphere but each implicit in the other" (93).

4. Also, Act 3, Scene 3 presents touches of fatality and death, offering a glimpse into to final act tragedy. It serves to mold the audience's expectations of death" (92).

F. Burke moves into the penultimate section, titled "The Wonder." In it, Burke opens with a discussion of Desdemona's handkerchief. Amid references to Aristotle and the notion of "accident," he ascribes to the handkerchief a kind of "magic" that prevents the audience from resenting its accidental discovery (93-94).

1. Burke claims that catharsis and wonder are the main attractive elements of tragedy (94).

2. Burke argues that, throughout the play's early acts, the handkerchief is associated with the sexual (95).

a. Some associations are private.

b. Some are more public (95).

c. Othello's language in reference to the handkerchief further links it to magical qualities (96).

3. In a moving conclusion, Burke returns to the notion of "reflexivity" (96). He argues that the play is an indictment of truth-in-ownership. In it, "there is also forever lurking the sinister invitation to an ultimate lie" (96). The hanky then represents the ease with which truth can be turned into falsity and forces us to examined the frightening possibilities of loneliness. Othello's suicide is the culmination of all of this. The ultimate in loneliness and reflexivity.

G. In the final section, "Related Plays by Shakespeare," Burke closes by attempting to clean up earlier sections and note how similar approaches can be taken to other Shakespearean works.

1. Burke recognizes that his analysis is, in some sense, incomplete.

2. He mentions scenes he wishes he could have examined in more depth.

3. He claims that Aaron from Titus Andronicus "merges important aspects" of Othello and Iago" (98). He argues that this offers support for his earlier argument regarding their interchangeability.

4. Burke points to a speech in Troilus and Cressida that shares similarities with the speech associated values with Desdemona. He claims "hierarchy" is important in both (99).

5. Measure for Measure seems like Othello in its use of the sexual.

6. Burke closes by mentioning that he has provided some details about the working of a single play. He expresses the desire to search for a motivational scheme that encompasses multiple plays and that "might account for the shifts from one work to another" (100). In an especially well-written closing remark, in reference to examining multiple plays, he says, "I admit that here all tends to grow nebulous. I use the word deliberately, thinking of great gaseous masses out of which solid bodies presumably emerge. But we should keep peering into these depths too, the farthest reaches of our subject. For here must lie the ultimate secret of man, as the symbol-using animal" (100).

VIII. "Timon of Athens and Misanthropic Gold"

A. Burke begins by wondering how one should approach Timon of Athens, deciding that, to start, "let's force ourselves to decide exactly what Timon of Athens is about" (101).

1. Burke summarizes the plot, saying the play is about a man who falls into debt. His friends fail to come to his rescue, and he becomes embittered. Formerly "generous to a fault," he now dislikes all and dies alone (101).

2. Yet, Burke believes such a broad summary is not enough. The story of Timon overlaps with the story of Alcibiades. In order to show the correspondences, Burke outlines the story of Alcibiades act by act.

a. Act 1: Alcibiades appears briefly with a line that reflects positively on eating, a theme treated negatively in much of the play (102).

b. Act 3: Alcibiades is banished. Shakespeare allows the audience to think that Timon is the one whose punishment is being debated. There is an ambiguity between the two characters (102).

c. Act 4: Alcibiades makes friendly gestures to Timon but is rejected and insulted (102).

d. Act 5: Timon dies and Alcibiades wins a victory. Alcibiades claims Timon was noble (102).

3. The character of Apemantus is also important, even though some doubt that Shakespeare authored the scenes in which he appears. Burke argues, "Apemantus serves to keep the play from falling simply into contrasted halves" (103).

4. Burke summarizes the important aspects of the play.

a. "Excessive universal generosity, exemplified by Timon" (103).

b. "A correspondingly excessive universal misanthropy, represented prophetically by Apemantus before Timon's crisis and culminatively by Timon after the crisis" (103).

c. "A factional warlike opportunistic element (represented by Alcibiades) that holds to neither of such absolute attitudes, but has definite, limited ends, and will readily make peace if they are attained" (103).

B. Burke points out that Timon is a difficult character to sympathize with (104).

1. The loyalty of Timon's servant Flavius is one of the few things that keep Timon sympathetic in the eyes of the audience.

2. The play is "almost wholly concerned with relations among men" (104). The only women present are courtesans and dancing girls. As Burke writes, "Fittingly, there are no mothers, sisters, or wives in this play" (105).

3. Burke describes Timon as a "brutally end-of-the-line character, his life coming to a close in rabid talk of human rot" (105).

4. Flavius is the only character who can induce the audience to pity Timon, and he does precisely that late in Act 4 (105-106).

C. Having detailed the play's basic plot and examined Timon's character, Burke opens a new section by arguing that Timon is important as a villifier.

1. Burke mentions three distinct kinds of "primary 'freedom of speech'" (106).

a. Invective is a kind of "helpless rage" (106).

b. Lamentation is "undirected wailing" (106).

c. Praise is the third (106).

2. Invective is the most important as far as Timon is concerned.

a. While each of the three forms of speech can lead to rebuke, invective is most likely to do so. Therefore, invective "must soon be subjected to control" (106).

b. Still, invective does have social purposes. It can be cathartic (107).

c. It is difficult to create intentional invective because it "quickly comes under the control of self-protective repression" (107). Therefore, if a playwright can create genuine invective, he or she will have created something intrinsically interesting, as long as he or she can keep it within certain tolerances.

d. Many of Shakespeare's characters demonstrate this kind of eloquent invective. Lear and Coriolanus are two examples (108).

e. Yet, no one demonstrates it quite as well as Timon.

3. Burke compares Timon to Midas, arguing that, when Timon rails against an evil, he claims that the whole world exemplifies that evil (108). Everything Timon touches turns into an example of universal corruption.

4. Timon, then, has a certain appeal as a villifier, but the playwright must be careful not to too greatly offend audience sensibilities.

D. Burke moves on to discuss Timon's situation within the play as problematic.

1. The possibility is hinted at that "Timon is surrounded not by friends but by flatterers" (110).

2. Burke calls this the "problem of substance" (110). We often seek to connect with others by being useful to our friends, but "this means of establishing a bond with them is by its very nature suspect, for the attempt to please or reward friends can become but a way of attracting parasites" (110).

a. This is an important problem for Burke, and he connects it to Marxist notions of property (110). Private accumulation "severs one's bonds with others while also putting a person in constant jeopardy of loss" (110).

b. Shakespeare's play embodies the opposite principle. Timon's generosity gave way to the problem of debt, and his "friends" abandoned him. As Burke argues, "There is a such in which any such generosity would be a squandering, and in the last analysis unrequited" (111).

c. Burke acknowledges that the problem in its specifics does not apply to all, or even many, it should "in principle" apply to everyone (111).

3. Thus, Burke argues, Timon becomes obstinate and so too does the play itself (111). Invective gold comes to replace Timon's lost fortune, thus Burke calls the notion of gold "intensely pejorative" within the play (111).

E. Burke summarizes his argument with nine points about Timon of Athens.

1. "Choice of a character with a vile tongue, as likely material for a drama" (112).

2. "Absolute misanthropy as a motive about which to organize his cantankerousness" (112)

3. "Disappointment to justify his misanthropy" (112).

4. Prior, overgenerous, prosperousness, to set the condition for his disappointment" (112).

5. "Two closely related characters, each like-minded in a notably different way, and both shunned by him" (112).

6. "Friends, guests, creditors, servants, and various other supernumeraries added, to meet incidental requirements of the plot" (112).

7. "Since invective is motivationally fecal, gold provides a term that straddles both the theme of money and the theme of misanthropy" (112).

8. "Beastly imagery in general, and dog imagery in particular serve as a variant source of misanthropic metaphors" (112).

9. "The closely related imagery of eatingÉfits well, as connoting corresponding kinds of appetition, either obsequious or rapacious" (112).

IX. "Shakespearean Persuasion: Antony and Cleopatra"

A. Burke opens with a statement regarding the "psychological tics" or authors, claiming that many often return to favorite images (113).

1. For many authors, these "tics" are easy to spot.

2. The case is different with Shakespeare, as he is always using numerous, complex images in a variety or ways (113).

3. Reading Antony and Cleopatra, however, struck Burke in an important way, and his analysis yielded some thoughts on the ordering of the play (113-114).

4. Additionally, he was struck by the role of persuasion in the play, and he promises to use the essay to give some thoughts on the long-questioned role of rhetoric and persuasion in poetry (114).

B. Burke reviews the plot of Antony and Cleopatra act-by-act.

1. Burke takes care to juxtapose the affairs of the Roman state with the affair of Antony and Cleopatra in his summary.

2. He comes to the conclusion that "Love is in essence an Empire," and claims, "In Antony and Cleopatra Shakespeare works with that motivational trend, grandly" (114).

3. Burke argues that Shakespeare uses the theme to make his audience feel grand. They all have some connection to love, and he "translates the theme of love into terms of imperial ostentation" (115). By turning a theme that everyone can relate to into something as grand and majestic as Rome, Burke argues that Shakespeare's audience "will gladly go along with him, in a benign conspiracy of self-admiration" (115).

4. Shakespeare portrays Octavius nobly as well, in order to build up Antony's character by giving his rival certain noble traits (115).

C. But Burke believes that Shakespeare does much more than simply translate love into grand terms.

1. The character of Lepidus provides an example.

a. Lepidus is ridiculed within the play for trying to gratify both Caesar and Antony.

b. His ridiculed upgrades Caesar and Antony.

2. Shakespeare is also cleverly reversing a theatrical tradition.

a. As Burke writes, "In the Cornelian 'theater of admiration,' only political themes were deemed wholly worthy of the style. Love could be introduced but secondarily, as a motive that helps complicate the plot" (116).

b. Shakespeare brilliantly "reverses the order," describing love primarily in terms of politics (116).

D. Burke points out that Elizabethan England was and "Empire on the make," and uses that claim to further a conception of the play that matches Shakespeare's method to the historical situation and expectations of his audience (116).

1. Since historical circumstances are reflected in personal relationships, and since the audience is living in an imperial time, there is a sense in which personal relationships are imperial (116).

2. Antony and Cleopatra is compared with Romeo and Juliet.

a. The difference is that the lovers Antony and Cleopatra are associated with rising empires, or political states. The lovers Romeo and Juliet were associated with feuding families, a remnant of a bygone political age (116).

b. Still, the endings are similar, both involving mistaken suicides.

c. Also, Antony marries Caesar's sister, meaning "family motives significantly complicate the political ones" which also happens in Coriolanus (116).

3. So, the play acts out the principle that "Implicit in human relations under conditions of emergent empire there are forms of empire as such" (116).

a. Yet, again, we have Shakespeare complicating things with and added twist.

b. Shakespeare's building up of love is complicated by his choice to write about Cleopatra's death in terms of simplicity.

c. Burke describes Cleopatra's death as depicted "in terms of a woman nursing a child, facing death defined euphemistically in terms of sleep" (117).

d. Yet, Burke argues that the simplification is itself presented grandly, concluding "Its denial depends on its affirmation" (117). Shakespeare's grand portrayal of love as empire is thus complicated by virtue of being simplified. It's a paradox that points again to Shakespeare's skill.

4. Burke makes the case that Shakespeare's uses various devices to allow his audience to identify with Antony and Cleopatra.

a. The frequent references to "eunuchs" highlight Antony's sexual skills by comparing him to men who have means to fornicate. All the men in the audience are therefore equal to him by virtue of differing from the foil (118).

b. The women in the audience can relate to Cleopatra's "frailties" as well as to the closing image of her as nurse (118-119).

5. Burke returns to what he previously called the "problem of substance," (See: Timon of Athens essay), this time proposing a variation called "the paradox of substance," as represented by Antony and Cleopatra.

a. Antony and Cleopatra cannot stand on their own, but they audience is made to believe that they alone embody the grandeur of Rome and Egypt respectively.

b. Summing up the paradox, Burke claims, "One cannot separate the intrinsic properties of a character from the situation that enables him [sic] to be what he is" (120).

c. Burke relates Shakespeare's telling of love in terms of empire to his earlier notion of "socio-anagogic analysis," giving a divine flavor to worldly hierarchy (121).

6. Burke claims that Shakespeare's imperial love story is both aggrandizing and hubristic (121).

a. On the one hand, it is relatable. On the other, it is pretentious and excessive.

b. Burke returns to the idea of "excess" (See Introduction as well as Timon of Athens). Shakespeare's play shows the dangers of the most extreme form of love, allowing the audience to distance themselves from the characters (121-122)

E. Burke ruminates on whether or not the play can be reduced to a Freudian Love and Death, coming to the conclusion that Love, Death, War, and Sleep are all closely related, and the relationship between Love and War is evident in the play (122).

1. Burke writes, "Antony as warrior is what imparts the political dimension to the love relationship" (122).

2. Burke compares and contrasts Shakespeare's treatment of war with Plutarch's, noting how the former uses war to connect Antony and Cleopatra (123).

F. Moving on, Burke enters into a discussion that revolves around the author-audience relationship. He explores the ways in which dramatist address the various objections audiences may have to their plays (123).

1. One way to address audience objections is to place a statement of them into the mouth of a minor character.

a. Homer does this with Thersites, who oppose the Trojan War, but he persuades the audience by Thersites a completely objectionable character in all other respects (123-124).

b. Shakespeare is different. "Shakespeare can allow even a strong charge against Antony's heroics to get stated" (125).

c. Burke compares Shakespeare's stating of objections to setting up a department store. "You could put in a counter here or there to gratify some particular set of customersÑand if you weren't too emphatic about it, with those who wanted other goods it simply would not register" (125). He claims this is also a good way to start building an empire.

2. Shakespeare's kind of theater was a complex one, and as a result he was able to address audience objections without putting them in the mouth of a disliked character.

G. Burke closes with a list of topics he wishes he could have addressed in more detail.

1. Burke finds the way Shakespeare plays with the masculinity of Antony and the femininity of Cleopatra to be interesting. He wishes it could be further explored, especially as it relates to the serpent theme and the theme of Cleopatra's overall capriciousness (125-126).

2. Burke is also intrigued by the notion of pity, especially as it plays out in Act IV. Comparisons between Shakespeare and Plutarch are again mentioned.

3. The sexual connotations and double entendres used throughout the play, especially in terms of Cleopatra's dream of Antony in Act V (126).

4. The death of Antony and the notion of Fortune or Fate as it relates to the play as intentionally produced by Shakespeare and as a product of historical caprice. That is, Shakespeare was "fated" to live in emerging imperial England (127)

5. All of these can be scene as instances of persuasion, but Burke wants to fully conclude by examining the play's "reflexivity" (127).

a. The suicides of the main characters are the most obvious evidence of reflexivity, but it shows up elsewhere (127).

b. In Act I, Scenes 2 and 3, the news of the death of Antony's wife Fulvia induces reflexive reactions in both Antony and Cleopatra.

c. Burke goes on to list several other references to the theme, all made by minor characters or by major characters in reference to minor characters.

d. Burke closes by claiming that all these instances may be an attempt at persuasion, but they may also transcend it to become part of the form of the play. He invokes the symmetrical foils of Timon of Athens in both Shakespeare and Plutarch, claiming that traces of the themes of Timon of Athens (see above outline) are visible in Antony and Cleopatra.

The above sections were outlined by Brett Biebel unless otherwise noted. The following sections were outlined by Joe Bartolotta.

KB on Shakespeare

"Corolanius—and Delights of Faction"

Part I:

KB opens by locating the play in a historical context having been premiered after the rioting due to the Enclosure Riots (an event he explains in detail at the end of the essay), thus the context of the play is one of patricians versus plebeians, albeit in Rome rather than London. Nonetheless, Burke argues that Shakespeare is "playing up" the tensions between the classes (130). KB thinks the degree to which Coriolanus exhibits hubris as a noble is so excessive that the audience will not think of him so much as a scapegoat for the impending tragedy. KB believes Shakespeare has emphasized Coriolanus as a character whose failure has been his inability to outgrow his childishness in his affinities for his class, his family and his country (134-5).

KB also discusses the role of Menenius in "shaping the audience's sympathies." (137) Burke examines the similarities and differences between Menenius and Corolanius, settling that Menenius is both a character who brings some events of the play to a comic light and for introducing a discussion of a "body politic" to the play (138).

Part II:

KB considers the timeliness of the play. He contends that while Coriolanus lacks the qualities of a modern dictator to gain a popular movement (due partially through his open disdain toward the plebeians). However, KB does identify several themes (individualism, class, family) that are timeless, and that all of these themes are motivations that entangle to make a "motionless knot" wherein Corolanius will not be able to untangle the motives but only get satisfaction by doing something with this "knot" (143).

Part III:

Burke reconsiders Corolanius as a "railer," that is, the character who keeps "mixing things up" (142). KB also assesses the character of Coriolanus through his assessment Timon of Timon of Athens. Burke concludes that the audience, although they may despise what Corolanius says throughout the play is still drawn in to see what becomes of him.

Part IV:

Burke offers a culmination of his criticism, asserting Coriolanus is:

1. Primarily a cathartic vessel residing "in the excessiveness with which he forces us to confront the discriminatory motives intrinsic to society as we know it"

2. The catharsis is "expressive" as the individual comes into conflict with the demands of family, class and nation.

3. The play contains a controlled environment in which the repressed may feel they have a voice but generally does not challenge the greater social hierarchy.

4. As a scapegoat, the audience recognizes that he comes to his proper end by the end of the play.

Comment:

Burke discusses the Enclosure Act in brief. The Enclosure Acts dispelled many farmers from their common lands (that is, unowned property) as private landowners "enclosed" on the property. Burke also discusses the heroic properties of Corolanius in that he "never matures" (146). Burke also briefly notices some important differences between Shakepeare's Corolanius and Plutarch's.

"King Lear: Its Forms and Psychosis"

Part I:

Burke considers how the popularity of Lear perplexes him, as he does not understand how the play appeals to younger audiences. He believes that the play's absurdities make it attractive alluding to Tertullian's credo quia absurdum to guide his analysis (152). Simply put, the play has so many absurdities that tax the audience's willingness to go along with the evolving story that they "are a positive factor in the plays success, when it is a success" (152). KB also offers a brief summary of the plays plot points (153).

Part II:

Burke considers the plot of the play, What is it about? (155). He writes of the basic outline of the plot, but becomes settled on exploring the topic of abdication. It is no different from being about "oldsters" who move to Florida, abdicating some office at home and so the play demonstrates a "paradox of substance" in that the identities of the characters become defined by what they have given up, especially is this true with Lear (158).

Part III:

KB asserts one of the most apparent tensions in the play is that of loyalty versus disloyalty, and that the elderly and deposed king is an even greater tension in indentifying his social standing, especially after Lear has divided his kingdom (160-1). KB assesses the loyalty of Cordelia and Kent toward Lear as he treats them harshly as demonstrating the "purity of their motive" to be loyal to Lear (161-2). KB likewise examines the disloyalty of Goneril and Regan (162).

Part IV:

Burke revisits the theme of abdication, this time asking what motive the dramatist has in making the story a tragedy. He identifies Lear as a character within a sacrificial context. He must fall so he can realize the loyalty of Kent and Cordelia (163).

"Notes on Trolius and Cressida"

This article is actually a response written by Burke to a graduate student at Washington University in St. Louis. Most of the piece (for it is not an "essay" in the best sense of the word) addresses particular points in the student's paper. The student's paper, we are to glean from this text, is centered on the transformation of Cressida (168-9), a focus Burke finds interesting and engaging. However, Burke thinks the paper should also place some greater emphasis on the "Trolius-Cressida plot" (167).

"Why a Midsummer Night's Dream"

I:

KB explains that he will focus for the most part on "the standard distinction between the two queens" (173). KB also argues that the treatment of the "woodsy atmosphere" suggests that the play is presented from "a noble patron's point of view" (174) and that this social gap may have influenced Shakespeare's presentation of the mechanicals.

II:

KB explores the meaning of a dream as part of the setting for this play. He alludes to Dante, seeing the dream as a place that begins a consideration within the characters about some overarching problem (175). KB sees the dream as potentially embellishing and exploiting the social values of the non-dreamworld within the dreamworld--which the dream helps mask the conventions of the existing social structure(177).

III:

KB contrasts the play in part to Coriolanus, as in Coriolanus the main character openly detests the populace, in the comedy of the Midsummer Night's Dream, the characters of many classes "take it easy" in the context of the dream (177-8). The dream obscures the distinctions of class, especially between the Queens, Titania and Hippolyta (180). Through the construction of the dreamworkd through the play, KB thinks lower-class audiences members would find the play appealing (181).

IV:

KB explores A Midsummer Night's Dream in the context of humanism versus technologism. He assesses technologism as a move to address problems caused by technology with more technology, rather than moderation in the use of technology (182). He views the play as "fanciful embodiment of the Humanistic attitude" (184).

"Notes on Macbeth"

I:

The first part of this essay has very little to do with Macbeth, KB instead addressing "conventional form" as he responds to a friend's objection to his essay "Psychology and Form" (187-9). Burke considers form and the presentation if new information through examples of Charles Chaplin in Verdoux and Aristotle (as mediations on surprises and form) and Hitler (who is argued to keep new information and surprises to a minimum in his writing) (189-90). Burke introduces the next part of the essay as an investigation into the "conventional form" he observes in Macbeth (193) while going on to discuss conventional form in other dramataic texts from the western tradition.

II:

KB explores the actualizations of the "kill" in Macbeth, considering how the play is set up with "vulgar" and "grotesque" characters carrying out acts of murder (206), and how the context of Shakespeare differs from that of the "vulgarians killing" (207) seen at Burke's on television. KB argues that murder in Macbeth has a different psychological quality in its executions and how it effects the audience than modern television.

III:

Subtitled "Regicide," KB returns to "Psychology and Form" by addressing the psychosis of regicide. He sees royalty killed, one after another (Duncan, Lady Macbeth, Macbeth himself, and through the "fiction of the play," Banquo) and he argues at the end of the essay that the theme of regicide is meant to give the audience a "tragic pleasure" (210).

Appendix

The appendix serves as a compendium of other references to Shakespeare in Burke's works. The Appendix is organized chronologically by his published volumes, identifying the references in their chapters and subsections.

Reviews

The following is a working list of reviews about this book from a variety of scholarly disciplines including rhetoric, drama studies, Shakespearian studies and Burkean studies.

Battista, Andrew. Rev. of Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. K.B. Journal (Online).

http://kbjournal.org/shakespeare

Clark, Ira. Rev. of Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. Comparative Drama. (2008) 42.2:234-7.

Eskew, Doug. Rev. of Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 38.3:341-3.

Grosholz, Emily. Rev. of Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. The Hudson Review. (2008) 61.3.

Harries, Martin. Rev. of Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. Theater Survey. (2008) 49:305-7.

Keyishian, Harry. Rev of Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. The Shakespeare Bulletin. (2008)

26.3:107-12

Salomon, William. Rev. of Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. College Literature. (2009) 36.1:160-2.

van Oort, Richard. "Kenneth Burke's Shakespearean Anthropology." Rev. of Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. Anthropoetics (Online). (2008) 14.1.

http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1401/1401vanoort.htm

Voss, Tony. Rev. of Kenneth Burke on Shakespeare. Shakespeare in Southern Africa. (2008)

20:73-5